NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

While the OFFICE of President remains in highest regard at NewEnergyNews, this administration's position on climate change makes it impossible to regard THIS president with respect. Below is the NewEnergyNews theme song until 2020.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

NEW ENERGY TAX CREDITS: SOLAR STOCKS DROP, BLUE DOGS HOWL

Solar stocks, reacting to news about the New Energy tax credits, were already dropping when the news broke that Congress rejected the rescue package. The news did no good for any sector of the market, much less solar stocks.

There was a moment some months back when news of toxic waste dumping by solar manufacturers in China set off a short panic in solar stocks. NewEnergyNews suggested taking a deep breath, waiting the day out and buying low at the end of it. Solar stocks came back the next day, as predicted. This is different.

Here’s the good news: It’s always darkest before the dawn.

There are going to be sessions Thursday and Friday, and maybe even over the weekend again. And there is every reason to think Congress will then pass a bailout package.

As for the New Energy tax credits: Staffers on both the Democratic and Republican sides of the House confided to NewEnergyNews that the market was telling the truth: There is no reason to believe lawmakers will put through a bill extending the New Energy tax credits before the November 4 election.

As reported here yesterday, House Democrats have brought forward revised versions of the legislation but the word on Capitol Hill is that H.R. 7201 and H.R. 7202 are not radically different than H.R. 6070, the House bill the Senate refused to consider in place of its bill, H.R. 6049. (See ENERGY TAX CREDITS – COMPROMISE OR R.I.P. UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION?)

Both the House and Senate bills approved extension of the New Energy tax credits and both bodies passed their bills by large majorities. Extension is expected to fail for the 7th time in 18 months, however, because the House and the Senate cannot agree on how to fund extension in a way that will not force President Bush, who claims to want to approve extension, to veto.

The Senate passed its version of the extensions 93-2, along with a general package of revenue “pay-fors” on September 23. The House Democratic majority, pushed by the fiscally conservativeBlue Dogfaction, altered the Senate bill, taking very specific tax breaks away from the oil industry and very specific tax-havens away from the financial sector to create additional pay-fors, passed the new version 226-166, and sent it back for Senate approval September 27.

The House will not approve the Senate scheme for funding the tax credit extensions and the Senate will not approve the House plan.

Senator Max Baucus (D-Mont), Chairman, Senate Finance Committee: “The House and Senate just don’t talk to each other enough and work on trust and understanding…That’s what this really is. They’re in their little world. We’re in our little world, instead of just sitting down like adults, both sides, House and Senate and working out solutions.”

Maybe. Or maybe this is all part of the solution to a different problem, the election.

By handling the legislation like this, everybody who wants to can now say they voted for extending the New Energy tax credits. And it gives both parties something substantive to run on. Liberal Democrats will tell their base to actively support their candidates if they want New Energy. Blue Dog Democrats and Republicans will tell their base to actively support their candidates if they want New Energy but not new taxes.

That’s why they call this “the silly season.”

It’s also why solar stocks are likely to plummet farther, for longer, this time. Buying low this time is only for those who can afford to hold the stocks for some time, possibly until well into 2009, before seeing any significant upturn in value.

Last caveat on solar stocks: Those who can buy solar stocks as they bottom out, and hold them, will eventually be glad they did.

Why? Because while the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrats in the House are leading the pack now, there is every reason to believe a compromise can be reached after the election.

The current stalemate benefits all the players politically. After the election, however, the two parties are likely to hold a “lame duck” session, one last hurrah, according to hill insiders. Speaking off the record, one Congressional staffer told NewEnergyNews Congress is likely to suddenly realize the New Energy tax credits are far too important and far too non-controversial to NOT extend for next year.

Jim Cooper (D-Tenn), member House Blue Dog Coalition: “We’re all for the legislation, but it needs to be paid for…”

They have until December 31 to come to their senses and find a way through the partisan mire.

And, finally, even if this Congress decides to stonewall New Energy, the next Congress could extend the credits retroactively.

Either way, a lot more is now riding on the November 4 outcome.

From “the big picture is brighter” file: The fall of solar stocks was particularly pronounced because the major news of the day would otherwise have driven stock values higher.

Although there was disappointing news of a toxic spill at a silicon plant in China (no injuries, controlled quickly), Spain announced new feed-in tariff caps of 100 megawatts per quarter plus a bonus hundred megawatts. This constitutes 100 extra megawatts for this year and 100 more megawatts for 2009 than was expected, adding 15% to the total number of megawatts to be subsidized through 2010. It will mean bigger solar energy industry volume. Bigger volume drives costs down. Lower costs means more volume. Etc.

Implication: Beyond this contentious silly season, there could be a constellation of factors both in the U.S. and abroad conspiring to drive renewed growth.

WHATSolar stocks, reacting to the likely failure of the solar energy industry’s investment tax credit (ITC) to be extended by Congress, were dropping ahead of the news that Congress rejected the financial markets bailout package.

WHEN- One version of the tax credit extensions passed in the Senate September 23.- Another version of the tax credit extensions passed in the House September 27.- Solar stocks fell September 29 as it became apparent the tax credits would not win extension in the current session of Congress- Congress expected to adjourn for the election as soon as the financial markets bailout package is settled.- December 31: The existing New Energy tax credits expire.

WHEREUntil extended, the tax credits and the New Energy industries remain in limbo.

- Research from Navigant Consulting shows the 8-year tax credit extension means 440,000 new solar industry jobs and a doubling of new solar capacity to ~630 megawatts in 2009. - H.R. 7060:(1) extends the production tax credit (PTC) for wind 1 year, (2) extends the PTC for biomass, hydrokinetic and geothermal energies 2 years, (3) extends the investment tax credit (ITC) for solar systems and small wind turbines 8 years, (4) has an 8-year extension on energy efficiency building improvement tax credits, (5) has tax benefits for buying electric vehicles (EVs), has tax benefits for producing cellulosic ethanol and advanced biodiesel, (6) includes many of the same benefits (to veterans, teachers, Native Americans, hurricane victims, etc.) that were in the package passed by the Senate September 23,(7) includes tax credits for “clean” coal development, (8) extends major R&D tax credits,(9) excludes tax credits to oil shale producers and coal-to-liquid producers, (10) removes the controversial tax credit to New York City to help redevelop the World Trade Center zone.- H.R. 7060 pay-fors:(1) freezes an oil industry deduction on earnings (raising $4.9 billion over 10 years), (2) changes the way stock sales are accounted for (raising $6.7 billion/10 years), (3) extends existing taxes on unemployment income and the oil spill liability fund ($3.2 billion/10 years), (4) redefines foreign oil earnings and expenses ($2.2 billion/10 years), (5) postpones a cut in taxes on foreign interest earnings ($18.6 billion/10 years),(6) closes a loophole on deferred compensation from tax haven corporations ($24.8 billion/10 years).

QUOTES- Dan Ries, analyst, Collins Stewart: “[T]he ITC extension looks stalled until after the election and possibly until a new president is sworn in…[It is] a setback for the solar industry…”- Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah): “That’s a tragedy because there was a lot of good stuff in there that really would help our industry at a time when they need it…” - Mitch McConnell (R-Ky), Minority Leader, U.S. Senate: “The Senate is not going to pass those components in a different configuration.”- Congressman Thomas M. Reynolds (R-NY): “The Democrats have failed to produce a result with tax extenders that are vitally important to our economy moving forward…They run the Senate. They run the House. And they couldn’t get it done.”- Monica McGuire, executive secretary, R&D Credit Coalition: “The political virtue of compromise is absent in the waning days of the 110th Congress, marked in part by failure to restore and strengthen the R&D tax credit that is included in tax extenders legislation…”

BIG BOOM IN SMALL WIND

Small wind turbines are big business in the U.S. and getting bigger. 9,092 small turbines were sold in the U.S. in 2007, 14% growth over the previous year, generating $42 million in revnues. 2008 sales figures to date suggest this year’s growth may reach 20%.

Ron Stimmel, small wind advocate, American Wind Energy Association (AWEA): "The interest is just skyrocketing. People are looking for ways to seize their own energy future, so to speak, and become personally energy independent while helping to protect the environment…"

Hundreds of models on the U.S. market, 100 kilowatts and less, range in cost from $14,000 to $60,000.

A common estimate of average U.S. household power is in the ~1,000 kilowatts/month range. Small turbine power generation is dependent on seasonal and diurnal winds and placement.

Example of small wind in action: Dr. Carlos Fernandez, transplant surgeon and turbine seller, uses 4 small turbines on his Paso Fino horse farm north of Washington, D.C. He is not energy independent but his utility purchases have dropped from 5,400 kilowatts/month to 2,000 kilowatts/month. He recently built an indoor training ring that is completely independent of the grid.

Dr. Fernandez: "I think sooner or later I am going to be producing more than I use here, because I am always tinkering with more power production…Figuring out how I can get every ounce out of those turbines. Whether it is a taller tower, whether it is better electronics. My goal is to be totally energy independent."

More than a footnote: Based on changes in New Energy sales after 2005, when residential solar photovoltaic systems began qualifying for a 30% investment tax credit (ITC), a provision making small wind eligible for a comparable ITC (included in the currently pending New Energy incentives legislation unlikely to be passed by Congress) would probably add 40-to-50% to annual small wind growth.

WHEN- Fernandez has been developing small wind for “…the past several years.”- 2001: 2,100 small wind units installed in the U.S. with a capacity of 2,100 kilowatts.- 2007: 9,092 units installed with a capacity of 9,737 kilowatts.

WHERE- 8,905 of the 9,092 turbines sold in the U.S. in 2007 were manufactured in the U.S.- There are at least 49 U.S. small turbine manufacturers and at least 84 non-U.S. small turbine manufacturers.

WHY- The market in 2007: 9,092 units sold, 98% (8,905) were from U.S. manufacturers; 14% growth (9.7 megawatts of capacity added); $42 million in 2007 sales; Cumulative U.S. installed capacity is now 55-60 megawatts.- On-grid: 1,292 units, 5,720 kilowatts. - Off-grid: 7,800 units, 4,017 kilowatts.- There are an estimated 350-to-400 full time jobs and 95 part time jobs from the small wind industry.- Costs: $3-to-5 per watt of capacity; 10-to-15 cents per kilowatt of production.- Dr. Fernandez has 20 horses in two barns, 2 houses, an indoor training ring and other structures, all fully powered.- Dr. Fernandez uses 4 small turbines, 2 modern designs made specifically for small scale power production and 2 designed to pump water from deep wells, to drop his utility-purchased electricity from 5,400 kilowatts/month to 2,000 kilowatts/month. His systems include batteries for the storage of excess generation.

QUOTES- Dr. Fernandez: "Our own lives have been turned upside down by the cost of gasoline going up in the last two years…I think we would have a lot more freedom if we were to make our own power."- Dr. Fernandez: "This particular one was manufactured in 1905. I found it basically in a yard sale. I brought it home and started playing with it to make a conversion to make electricity…"- Dr. Fernandez: "For wind power, the main issue is site, you know - where you are going to locate the tower? Obviously trees are not very friendly to windmills unless you can get 20 or 30 feet above them…"

1ST EMISSIONS AUCTION N U.S., A VIEW OF THINGS TO COME

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative Inc (RGGI, nicknamed “Reggie”) held its first emissions permits auction, the first emissions permits auction in the U.S.

The program is regarded as a trial run in anticipation of a national cap-and-trade system to be legislated under the next administration. Many assume Reggie credits will transfer to the national market when it is created.

Robert Stavins, director, Harvard Environmental Economics Program: “This is the first major successful auction in the world of CO2 allowances…More importantly, that a future U.S. federal cap- and-trade system is likely to use allowances that are at least partially auctioned off, it is important to observe RGGI's auction and learn from it.''

Reggie’s goal is to cut GhGs 10% by 2019.

Although the permits, good for the offsetting of 1 ton of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions in the course of generating power or otherwise conducting business, sold at auction for only $3.07, this was 65% above the $1.86 floor price, indicating buyers believe the right to emit will gain value over time.

This is considered especially good market performance because Barclays Bank, a veteran of the EU credits market, expected Reggie to be oversupplied and predicted a price of less than $2.

Annual allowances available will be ratcheted down yearly to 10% below current levels by the end of 2018. There are 2 goals: (1) To cut GhGs and (2) to drive the development of New Energy. The latter cannot happen, according to experts, until prices for emissions rise, making it more expensive to continue generating them than to invest in New Energy.

WHATThe RGGI kicked off its effort to fight global climate change through market-based greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions. The first price for credit to offset one ton of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) was $3.07.

WHEN- First auction was September 25 in anticipation of a trading regimen that opens January 1, 2009.- The next auction will be Dec. 17.- The first stage of Reggie is scheduled to run 3 years.- Reggie is the first U.S. market for allowances.

WHY- The first RGGI auction saw 59 bidders.- The opening price is far lower than the price of permits on the EU ETS but 65% higher than the base rate, suggesting there is demand for them on the expectation their value will increase.- RGGI intends to supply permits for 188 million tons of CO2e/year, 9% over 2007 emissions in the 10-state region.- All 12.57 million permits offered were sold in the auction that received bids for 51.7+ million allowances. - Reggie allows utilities, investors and other buyers to acquire and hold permits.- If increased levels of GhGs are reported, it would be expected to trigger higher demand for permits.- The auction raised $38.6 million for the states to use to cut electricity demand and build New Energy capacity.

QUOTES- Steve Schleimer, energy and environment market regulation director, Barclays Plc.: "People are probably seeing value in buying and holding… If you look at the back end of the program, it does become a short program …"- Schleimer: "Over time, as load in the region is growing and new plants are coming on line, there's going to be a point where there are 188 million tons made available and emissions will exceed that…That's one reason to see value in it."- Seb Walhain, head of environmental markets, Fortis: "I'm not a big fan of RGGI…"- Pete Grannis, commissioner, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation: "The first RGGI auction has successfully used market forces to set a price on carbon and this will send a clear market signal to support the investment in clean-energy technologies…"

Monday, September 29, 2008

ENERGY TAX CREDITS – COMPROMISE OR R.I.P. UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION?

Refusal by Congress and the President to extend vital New Energy industries tax credits is looming.

One place the story being followed closely is wind-rich West Texas, home to such disparate characters as President Lyndon B. Johnson and President George W. Bush.

The House-amended version (H.R. 7060) of the Senate-approved bill (H.R. 6049) hit what one House leader called “the wall” in the Senate over the weekend. Though both bills extend the New Energy tax credits, differences about how to fund them make the bills irreconcilable.

Max Baucus (D-Mont), Chairman, Senate Finance Committee: “This move in the House endangers tax relief that American businesses and families need right now…While I commend the House’s effort to fully offset the cost of this needed tax legislation, it is clear to me from discussions in the Senate that even this new package of bills will not pass in this body.”

Though leaders are struggling to draft compromise legislation (H.R. 7201, H.R. 7202), differences do not yet appear near resolution.

The cutoff of New Energy’s vital tax credits will hit hard in the President’s West Texas stomping grounds. Some around there are not feeling patient with the political leadership. Greg Wortham, executive director, West Texas Wind Consortium/Mayor, Sweetwater: "Support America or don't…Do their job or get out of office."

The local Congressman is more optimistic than most. U.S. Congressman Mike Conaway (R-Midland): "But I think it will get done this year…"

The fight for New Energy’s vital tax credits, chronicled in detail by NewEnergyNews since the summer of 2007 and especially during the last 2 weeks, is hanging in the balance.

The traditional power-generating energy industries have long benefited from subsidies and incentives provided by the taxpayer through acts of Congress (as calculated in a study done at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration,Federal Financial Interventions and Subsidies in Energy Markets 2007). In recent years, New Energy has begun to get a share of support. There could easily be a debate over whether it deserves more. But to refuse to allow it even what it has been getting is just plain nonsensical.

A GE Financial Services study shows investment in New Energy already pays for itself. Numerous other studies show New Energy will, in a carbon-constrained future, be the key to energy independence and world energy dominance.

If Congress does not extend the credits, they will expire December 31. With them will go the boom in the New Energy industries, one of the few sectors in U.S. financial markets that has continued to expand through the sadness of the current financial failure.

In West Texas, this is not a matter of stock market prices. Mayor Wortham: "There are plenty of projects that are being planned for 2009 that will step back...[People] want to have a good Christmas this year and buy toys for their kids...people that want to have a job in February..."

Ironically, both the House and Senate have approved extension of the New Energy tax credits by large majorities. Extension is expected to fail in Congress, for the 9th time in 18 months, because the House and the Senate cannot agree on how to fund it in a way that will not force President Bush, who claims to want to approve extension, to veto.

No, this is not theNPR Sunday Puzzle, this is political reality in an election year or, as it is known in Washington, “the silly season.”

The Senate passed the extensions 93-2, along with a general package of revenue “pay-fors” on September 23. The House Democratic majority altered the Senate bill, taking very specific tax breaks away from the oil industry and very specific tax-havens away from the financial sector to create additional pay-fors, passed the new version 226-166, and sent it back for Senate approval September 27.

Fiscal conservatives in the House and Senate, members who coincidentally represent many in the oil industry and financial sector, call the House pay-fors “raising taxes.” Their opposition cannot stop a bill containing such pay-fors in the House. They have, though, used – and probably again this week will use – the threat of a filibuster in the Senate to block such a bill from being voted on.

The irony: Everybody who wants to can now say they voted for extending the new Energy tax credits.

Example: Charles Rangel (D-NY0 Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, on the version of the bill he knows will produce rejection in the Senate: "With this bill, we can tell our kids and our grandkids that we encouraged energy production from wind and solar to make sure that future generations aren't hooked on foreign oil like we have been…"

The cynicism: Handling the legislation like this gives both parties something substantive to run on. Democrats will tell their base to actively support their candidates if they want New Energy. Republicans will tell their base to actively support their candidates if they want New Energy but not new taxes.

It’s a sorry state of affairs. Keith Johnson, energy blogger extraordinaire, Wall Street Journal: “The legislative stalemate will just prolong the agony for America’s clean-energy sector…The breakdown will also affect people who aren’t building massive wind farms, but just wanted to get solar power or a mini-wind turbine for their house…”

The market had no doubt about the meaning of the situation. From MarketWatch: “Solar stocks fell Friday after the U.S. House of Representatives OK'd a measure to extend billions in tax credits for renewable energy, but the measure faces an uncertain future because it differs from the Senate version…”

The NY Times’ Tom Friedman was his usual eloquent self on the situation and, as always, pointed in exactly the right direction: “Many things make me weep about the current economic crisis… I fear all it will leave behind are a bunch of empty Florida condos that never should have been built, used private jets that the wealthy can no longer afford and dead derivative contracts that no one can understand…

“…[W]e don’t just need a bailout. We need a buildup. We need to get back to making stuff, based on real engineering not just financial engineering…The exciting thing about the energy technology revolution is that it spans the whole economy — from green-collar construction jobs to high-tech solar panel designing jobs. It could lift so many boats…”

There are 3 possibilities left, 2 rather feathery (“Hope is the thing with feathers…”) and 1 that depends on the wisdom of the voters:

(1) The House and Senate could get caught up in the emotion spilling over from bipartisan cooperation in developing the financial crisis legislation and work out a compromise this week. (A smart bettor wouldn’t even check the odds on this one.)

(2) A lame duck session of Congress could be called after the election in which a compromise is forged. (So many things are up in the air right now, from the presidency to the economy to the war, that smart bookies probably wouldn’t give odds on this one.)

(3) Next year’s Congress could retroactively extend the tax credits. (The smart bet.)

In his despair, The Times’ Friedman turned to Van Jones, a longtime inspiration to NewEnergyNews (seeA GREEN NEW DEAL): “It’s time to stop borrowing and start building. America’s No. 1 resource is not oil or mortgages. Our No. 1 resource is our people. Let’s put people back to work — retrofitting and repowering America...You can’t base a national economy on credit cards. But you can base it on solar panels, wind turbines, smart biofuels and a massive program to weatherize every building and home in America.”

Have a visit with Van Jones below. No feathers there. It’s the kind of substance they like in West Texas.

WHEN- One version passed in the Senate September 23.- Another version passed in the House September 27.- 7201 or 7202 to be debated, passed by the House?- Taken up again by the Senate?- December 31: Both houses of Congress must approve the measure or the existing tax credits expire on the last day of the year. - Any day now: Congress expected to adjourn for the election.

WHEREIn limbo in the House.

WHY- Research from Navigant Consulting shows the 8-year tax credit extension means 440,000 new solar industry jobs and a doubling of new solar capacity to ~630 megawatts in 2009. - H.R. 7060:(1) extends the production tax credit (PTC) for wind 1 year, (2) extends the PTC for biomass, hydrokinetic and geothermal energies 2 years, (3) extends the investment tax credit (ITC) for solar systems and small wind turbines 8 years, (4) has an 8-year extension on energy efficiency building improvement tax credits, (5) has tax benefits for buying electric vehicles (EVs), has tax benefits for producing cellulosic ethanol and advanced biodiesel, (6) includes many of the same benefits (to veterans, teachers, Native Americans, hurricane victims, etc.) that were in the package passed by the Senate September 23,(7) includes tax credits for “clean” coal development, (8) extends major R&D tax credits,(9) excludes tax credits to oil shale producers and coal-to-liquid producers, (10) removes the controversial tax credit to New York City to help redevelop the World Trade Center zone.- H.R. 7060 pay-fors:(1) freezes an oil industry deduction on earnings (raising $4.9 billion over 10 years), (2) changes the way stock sales are accounted for (raising $6.7 billion/10 years), (3) extends existing taxes on unemployment income and the oil spill liability fund ($3.2 billion/10 years), (4) redefines foreign oil earnings and expenses ($2.2 billion/10 years), (5) postpones a cut in taxes on foreign interest earnings ($18.6 billion/10 years),(6) closes a loophole on deferred compensation from tax haven corporations ($24.8 billion/10 years).- H.R. 7201 and 7202 are reported to have (1) restored tax credits for coal-to-liquid. tar sands and oil shale development, (2) changed the credits to wind energy and plug-in vehicles and (3) reduced the pay-fors from oil tax breaks and financial tax havens.

QUOTES- Rhone Resch, President, Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), on what passage means: "You're going to see national markets open up for residential solar…"- Lyndon Rive, CEO, SolarCity: "Without [the ITC], we're not going to have scale that brings solar to grid parity, and investors aren't going to be interested…"- Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich): "It's about what is going to be enacted into law, and the shelf life on this bill is very, very short…"- Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Tx): "We've got a bill that has passed the Senate ... that is there for us to vote on and then get to the president…" - Keith Johnson, energy blogger extraordinaire, Wall Street Journal: “Both presidential campaigns are heavy on clean-energy rhetoric, and “green collar” jobs has become a mantra this election year. Will a lame-duck Congress be able to make that rhetoric a reality, after so many failures?”- K.R. Sridhar, the founder, Bloom Energy (quoted by Friedman): “Infants and the elderly who are disabled obsess about survival,” said Sridhar. “As a nation, if we just focus on survival, the demise of our leadership is imminent. We are thrivers. Thrivers are constantly looking for new opportunities to seize and lead and be No. 1.”- Bonus video: The Voice of Van Jones

”There’s nothing wrong with America that can’t be fixed by what’s right with America.” Bill Clinton. From VanJonesDotNet via YouTube.

PICKENS STILL PITCHING

Kicking off what he promises will be a new PR blitz, energy entrepreneur T. Boone Pickens spoke at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on September 22.

He sure can talk.

By now the Pickens Plan is plenty widely known. In spots all over the network and cable airwwaves, in personal appearances on everything butThis Old House, and ata websiteattracting millions to see charts and YouTube videos, Pickens has explained how the U.S. is too dependent on foreign oil and how he believes it can break the dependency by filling the midwestern plains with wind installations to generate electricity and transitioning the natural gas now used in electricity genertion to fuel for a large portion of the U.S. transportation fleet. So why the new campaign?

The megabillionaire says his new splash is designed to push the presidential candidates on THEIR energy plans.

Pickens: "I can tell you that we're going to turn up the heat…I've had over six and a half million people come in on that Web site. And I've signed up 400,000 of them. ... We call them an army, (and) we will march together…And we'll force plans out of both of these candidates by the time we get to election day. That's the way this is going to unfold, that they're going to have to have a plan. If they didn't, I failed what I started out to do.”

That Pickens is reaching his audience comes as no surprise to those aware of the reach of the PR firms the oil man hired,Patton BoggsandBenjamin Ginsberg.

Energy mavens around the internet and around the world are debating the practicality of building enough wind to meet 20% of U.S. power generation needs (completely doable, as affirmed by a U.S. Department of Energy study published in May) and the practicality of building a transportation infrastructure around compressed natural gas (CNG) (not so much).

Skeptics are wondering what is driving T.Boone. Is his motive political? Is he trying to expose a flaw in one of the candidate’s energy plan?

Pickens has met with both candidates, contributed to the Republican 2004 cause and went to the 2008 Democratic National Convention to push his energy plan.

Pickens: "Either one of them are fine with me…But they've got to have an energy plan for America.”

In fact, for all its potential impracticalities, there is political genius in the Pickens Plan because it brings together the interests of the oil-and-gas industry and the wind industry instead of putting them in opposition.

Pickens did say he’s troubled by Republicans convinced they can "drill their way out" of the current energy circumstances.

Many say Pickens is in it for personal gain. He is building the biggest wind installation in the world in Texas and owns a lot of natural gas. Pickens answer is that he is 80-years-old, has enough money and wants to do something for his country.

"What do I want? I want both of these candidates, and we are going to press it up, you are going to see a new series of ads…I am going to press it up to them that we want a plan, an energy plan to reduce, at least reduce, our foreign oil by 30 percent in 10 years."

Footnote: At the Press Club, Pickens told a great story about the mythical complaints against wind frequently mentioned by knowledgeless controversialists. A journalist, he said, went looking for somebody in a Texas region booming with wind installations who would complain. He spotted a guy on a street corner. “You know anybody who complains about the turbines?”

“Yep.”

“You know why they complain?”

“Yep.”

“Why?”

“Cause they ain’t got any turbines.”

Finally: Governor Brad Henry of oil-rich Oklahoma endorsed the Pickens Plan as a kick-off to the new campaign. Oklahoma is building wind as fast as it can get turbines.

WHATThe Pickens Plan condemns the U.S. dependency on foreign oil imports and proposes to change it by building wind installations across the Midwest for power generation and converting a part of the U.S. transportation fleet to compressed natural gas (CNG).

WHEN- September 22: Oklahoma’s Governor Henry signed the “Pickens Pledge.” - Yearly: $700 billion is transferred from the U.S. to oil-producing nations.- By 2030: Pickens’ plan would substitute the 20% of U.S. electricity will be generating for the natural gas used to generate that electricity now and use the natural gas to run a significant portion of the U.S. transportation fleet.

WHERE- Pickens’ recent appearance at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., generated yet more publicity for his “Plan.”- Governor Henry’s endorsement should help Pickens win converts in Oklahoma.- The richest source of U.S. onshore wind power is in the Midwestern corridor from the Texas panhandle to the Canadian border.

WHY- Pickens, like many others (including both major presidential candidates) believes it is unsustainable for the U.S. to go on spending $700 billion a year for foreign oil.- Pickens believes the $60 billion new national transmission system investment necessary to obtain the fullest production from new wind installations can come from entrepreneurial investment if the government will set a long-term policy supportive to wind development.- Govenor Henry says the Pickens Plan is necessary to protect national security and provide for the U.S. economic future. Between Oklahoma’s natural gas supplies and wind assets, the plan also provides pretty well for Governor Henry’s state’s economic future.- Pickens intends to mobilize an army of 400,000 believers he has signed up at his website in pursuit of a commitment on national energy policy from the two major presidential candidates. He obviously is seeking an endorsement but even if he doesn’t get it, he draws more attention to his plan by elevating himself into the national debate.- Carl Pope of the Sierra Club has been quoted as taking an interest in Pickens’ idea to run the trucking sector, which cannot run on battery power, on compressed natural gas.

QUOTEST. Boone Pickens, petroleum geologist/energy entrepreneur/visionary: "You go 10 years, you are going to be importing 75 percent of your oil…And I promise you the price will be $200 to $300 a barrel, I promise you that. And I keep my promises. I know what I am talking about. And you are going to be spending $2 trillion a year."

OREGON LOOKS TO OCEAN FOR NEW ENERGY

Wave energy, the final frontier – these are the voyages of a whole host of exciting, ambitious ideas, one or more of which will change the way the U.S. gets electricity.

If there is an echo, in that opening sentence, of the William Shatner titles voiceover for the originalStar Trek TV show, it is intentional. Wave energy developers are venturing into a virtually undiscovered realm seeking a huge potential energy discovery.

In another way, though, every story these days about hydrokinetic energies (wave, tide and current) is very similar: Testing is on-going, trials are imminent, there are a lot of regulatory hassles and there is opposition from environmentalists and the fisheries industries.

Case in point: Tillamook County in Oregon, seeing the gold rush going on in nearby Coos County, has jumped into the wave energy industry with goggles, wetsuit and flippers.

There are a few real wae eenrgy installations in Europe, none in the U.S. Competition along the east and west coasts is presently hottest to lock down parcels of ocean with powerful waves through pilot project applications. Buoy-style and cylinder-shaped concepts are still competing for superiority.

The West Coast, with a shorter drop off from the continental shelf into deep waters, holds more wave energy capacity potential than the East Coast, where the continental shelf is broad and offshore waters are shallow (ideal for the development of offshore wind installations).

Ocean Power Technologies (OPT) has been active in Coos County with a buoy device. Tillamook County, with partner with Pelamis Wave Power, is working on a cylindrical technology.

A Tillamook County fisherman, describing the Pelamis wave energy device: "It looks like a piece of salami with a 16-foot diameter…"

Regulators in the region are struggling to keep up with the developers. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) oversees projects inside a 3-mile line, and the Department of Interior’s Mineral Management Services (MMS) is responsible for projects outside those waters. It makes the permitting process – interesting?

Beyond bureaucratic complexities, confrontation with questions of environmental impact introduces another level of difficulty. There isn’t nearly enough yet known about the impact on marine life and habitat, on fisheries industries or on seabeds and shorelines.

The natural result: Opposition from fisheries industries and environmentalists.

With at least 2 inevitable levels of hoops to jump through (regulatory and environmental), getting into the wave energy game requires time, money and almost inexhaustible patience.

Example: Having sailed through the raging seas of federal and state regulation and completed some successful trial runs, OPT announced earlier this year it wanted to expand a small pilot project into a 200-buoy, 5-mile long project. It got a lot of outrage as a response.

Example: Tillamook County and Columbia Energy, its development partner, got its permits and financing set up. They are planning trial projects at Garibaldi, in the middle of important chinook fisheries, and at Netarts, in prime crabbing grounds. They are trying to prepare the locals. In response, the locals are trying to prepare the wave energy developers.

The developers have to get the idea across that local power production means a big local pay day: Jobs, tax revenues, and energy independence through clean New Energy.

Locals have to get the idea across to the developers that they’re happy to have the benefits if they don’t come at the expense of ocean habitats, traditional lives and livelihoods and treasured recreational resources.

Furman, Oregon Dungeness Crab Commission: "[The Reedsport 10-buoy project is] smack dab in the middle of crabbing grounds…We feel like we're struggling to keep up with the process…Let's put the brakes on a little."

It’s a classic confrontation: Energy developers versus locals. Each side has always learned from the other. (SeeLocal Hero)

The burning industries were always fired by black gold fever. New Energy developers feel the heat of climate change and rising world energy hunger.

The folks in the coastal counties wonder why the big city folks are in such a hurry.

WHEN- 2006 to 2008:The Oregon gold rush has developed over the last 2 years. - 2013: Tillamook County large-scale installations are at least 5 years off.- 2025: Wave energy projects in Oregon could be generating 500 megawatts of electricity.

WHERE- Oregon’s Tillamook County will develop 6 sites from Newport to Coos Bay. - Neighboring Coos County’s wave energy projects are in a 5-mile stretch, north to south, less than three miles from shore off Coos Bay, prime crabbing territory.- There are a few operating wave energy projects in Europe, none in the U.S. - Pelamis Wave Power is based in Scotland.- Columbia Energy Partners is based in Vancouver, British Columbia.- Ocean Power Technologies is based in New Jersey.

WHY- Columbia Energy Partners will do the Tillamook County feasibility study and handle the financing. - Each of the 6 Tillamook County sites is seaward three miles from a utility transmission substation.- The potential 500 megawatts of power capacity Tillamook County could generate is 3% of the state’s present consumption. - The Garibaldi and Netarts projects will each be 30 megawatts, small by the standards of Columbia Energy Partners’ wind installations but a crucial beginning in the wave industry.- The big OPT 200-buoy project would have an estimated 200-megawatt capacity.- OPT also has a more advanced 10-buoy project off Reedsport which could begin selling power in the next 1-2 years.

QUOTES- Paul Levesque, chief of staff, Tillamook County: "We can either wait until someone runs roughshod over us, or we can make sure we have a say in what happens…" - Len Bergstein, spokesman, OPT: "[We want to] show we're relentless in our willingness to sit around the table and discuss this project."

Sunday, September 28, 2008

WMD IN KURDISTAN

Could it be the Kurds have finally had enough of their land being the place where the world comes to fight for oil?

The Kurdistan Regional Government is inviting bids for the opportunity to do a study on the feasibility of building wind energy installations in the 3 Kurdish provinces.

The Kurds are sophisticated people, knowledgeable in the ways of the energy world and anxious to go to work build a better tomorrow.

They are also sharp businesspeople. From the announcement of bidding for the feasibility study: “All bids must be accompanied by a bid security of 100,000,000 (one hundred million) Iraqi Dinars [$84,206] or an equivalent amount in a freely convertible currency consigned in any official bank in the Kurdistan Region.”

For Iraq and the region, it would be a new kind of WMD: Wind as a Major Development.

WHEN- English-language bidding documents for an application to do the wind energy feasibility study became available 20 September 2008.- Bids for the opportunity to do the wind energy feasibility study must be delivered no later than 12pm, 20 October 2008.- Bids will be opened at 12:05pm on the deadline date.

WHERE- Feasibility studies will be for the 3 governorates that make up the Kurdistan region of Iraq.- Obtain English-language bidding documents from: Ministry of ElectricityKurdistan Regional GovernmentGeneral Directorate of the Diwan, Commercial DepartmentBrayaty, 60 Meter Street Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.- Bids will be opened at the Ministry of Electricity.

WHY- The plan: (1) Identify sites; (2) Collect/analyse wind data; (3) Designate the appropriate parameters for a wind installation at each selected site; (4) Complete a detailed feasibility report for each installation/site. - Bidders for the opportunity to do the feasibility study are required to have experience in wind energy and to have done at least 3 previous detailed wind energy feasibility studies.- English-language bidding documents cost a (non-refundable) payment of payment of 500,000 Iraqi Dinars ($425) in any convertible currency. The documents can be delivered by international courier for an additional $100 fee. - Late bids will be rejected.- Bidders’ representatives are invited to attend the opening of bids at the announced time and place.

LIFEVILLAGE FROM ENVISION BUILT IN COTE D’IVOIRE

"Infrastructure in a crate."

Designed by architects, LifeVillage(TM) is a self-contained building that can be shipped in 2 containers and rapidly assembled at any location, no matter how remote. It is powered by solar panels and contains a battery system for energy storage. It also has its own water treatment system.

LifeVillage(TM) is the product of Envision Solar International, the company founded by architects Robert Noble, AIA, LEED AP, and William Adelson, AIA, to further their goal of making solar energy more available and more aesthetically appealing.

Noble: "The LifePort(TM) and LifePod(TM) products were always intended to be enabling technologies for photovoltaics and other clean technology. The LifeVillage(TM), by including energy storage and water treatment, adds utility for an off-grid solution for remote areas without access to traditional infrastructure."

Adelson: "We were captivated by what occurred in Africa with the telecommunications industry…With the use of mobile telephones, the system is highly decentralized; effectively, satellite technology evolved more quickly than did the ability to install infrastructure in Africa."

Noble: "The goal is to plant LifeVillages(TM) anywhere decentralized critical infrastructure is needed, starting in Western and Central Africa…"

A demonstration project is planned for Cote d'Ivoire, on the west coast of Africa. An entire village will be built.

To demonstrate that LifeVillage(TM) is not only possible but practical, the demonstration project, at the specific request of the Cote d'Ivoire Ministry of Energy, will have both a small medical clinic and a schoolhouse. There will be housing for a resident doctor or nurse and housing for a teacher. Envision Solar is working with Scripps Health and Hospitals of San Diego on the clinic.

WHATLifeVillage(TM), created by Nobleand Adelson, is "infrastructure in a crate," a modular self-contained, multiple use structure that can be delivered where shelter is needed to provide community buildings powered by solar energy with battery backup and with their own self-contained water treatment system.

WHENA LifeVillage(TM) structure can be assembled and activated within two weeks of arrival.

WHERE- Prototype will be constructed/tested in the U.S. prior to deployment at 100 villages in Cote d'Ivoire.- Envision Solar and its founders/architects are based in La Jolla, Calif- ZBB Energy is based in Wisconsin.

QUOTES- Noble: "The LifeVillage(TM) structures can be used to create medical clinics, schools, housing for doctors and teachers, cell, mobile telephone, radio, TV, WiFi, and WiMax facilities and transmission. The combination of international building code engineered buildings, solar energy generation and battery storage provides all that is needed to improve health, safety, education, economics and general quality of life around every project or team has planned…" - Adelson: "We hope that the LifeVillage(TM) product will provide renewable energy and sustainable infrastructure for growth and advancement of underdeveloped areas."

WILL ITALY TURN TO NUCLEAR?

In the absence of an economy large enough to initiate a massive move to New Energy, governments have 3 choices for large-scale power generation: coal, nuclear or natural gas.

In the carbon-constrained society that Europe’s unblinking recognition of global climate change has turned it into, coal is not an option until “clean” coal is proven and becomes financially viable (if that ever happens).

Europe’s natural gas supplies must come from Russia or Persian Gulf nations. Europeans do not want to build their energy future around dependency on uncertain supplies from hostile governments.

That leaves nuclear.

Everybody from Vladimir Putin to John McCain touts the potential of nuclear energy but nobody is actually financing new plants. The problem with nuclear: Cost. As verified inRocky Mountain Institute (RMI) studies by Amory Lovins, investment is not presently going into nuclear energy because (1) plants are expensive, (2) extended construction guarantees long payback delays, (3) risks associated with accidents, spills and terrorism require unaffordable levels of insurance and (4) there is still no satisfactory solution for what to do with radioactive waste.

Italy’s renewable Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi recently signaled a change of direction for the country with pontifications about building new nuclear. The preceding, center-left Prodi government, in 2007, instituted a feed-in tariff to drive solar energy development along with wind energy and biomass energy quotas to drive development those areas. As intended, New Energy capacity is rising.

Italy has suffered brownouts and power shortages in recent years and takes the question of power supply seriously. It has just brought on line a world class LNG terminal. Will it stand for empty rhetoric about the feasiblity of a financially impractical nuclear future? Or will it push ahead with the development of its sun and wind and recycled waste resources, the real New Energy of tomorrow?

WHEN- Berlusconi returned to power in April- In May, the Italian government said it would begin building nuclear by 2013, the end of the current parliamentary term.- 1987: Italy responded to the nuclear disaster in Chernobyl with a referendum banning nuclear power for 20 years.

WHY- Italy has 4 operating nuclear plants and gets 10% of its electricity from them. They were in service before the Chernobyl incident.- Berlusconi claims his plan will lower the cost of electricity in Italy.- Italy expects assistance from the nuclear industries in France and the UK in developing nuclear.- Opposition to nuclear expansion is expected from the political left and from anti-nuclear activists.- Italy’s 2007 solar energy feed-in tariff has just this year begun attracting investment from solar producers and installers all over the world.

Saturday, September 27, 2008

The Circle Of Life

AKA What goes around comes around (and the theme song). It’s not the Disney version of “The Circle of Life," it’s the Brazilian World Wildlife Fund version, the version Disney would make if its rainforest was being destroyed at the rate Brazil’s is. From dabugattas via YouTube.

Architectural Wind

A "building integrated energy system." It does for wind what solar panels do for solar. The slogan is "Ride the winds of change." It is certainly change you can believe in. In fact, it's change you can buy. From diamondsolar via YouTube.

Sad Earth, Happy Earth

Interesting mix of image and sounds. It starts a little harsh but has a happy ending. Let's hope things turn out as well for the real Earth. Better yet, let's WORK to MAKE it turn out as well. From anitasancha via YouTube.

Friday, September 26, 2008

THE NEW ENERGY INCENTIVES, OR THERE AND BACK AGAIN

The fateful adventure of the New Energy tax credit extensions, though without dragons or swordplay, is only slightly less harrowing than Bilbo’s adventure and – like Bilbo going home to The Shire – appears headed once again back to the Senate.

Just 3 days ago, the Senate affirmed the tax credits by passing a bill that sent waves of exhilaration through the New Energy world and set New Energy stocks soaring on Wall Street.

All the New Energy tax credits in the Senate’s bill needed was ratification by the House of Representatives. No problem. The House originated the legislation last week and passed it then handily. Why wouldn't the House affirm it?

The Senate asked only one thing of the House: Pass it the way it was amended in the Senate. The compromises in the reconstructed measure were delicate. Pulling at the slightest thread could cause the whole thing to unravel.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev): "Don't send us back something else..It will not pass. If they try to mess with our package, it will die.''

But the House has something called the ‘pay-go” rule: For passage, any and all spending must have “pay-fors” from budget revenues.

The House bill, which is the rewrite of the Senate bill, which is the rewrite of the House bill (still with this?) appears to now be headed back to the Senate (although a procedural dispute at the end of Thursday left even the final vote uncertain). And nobody yet knows how or where or when the Senate will take it up.

“Everything is up in the air, everything is on the table…” a Senate staffer told NewEnergyNews Thursday.

The vital New Energy tax credits will expire December 31 if the legislation does not pass. Expiration will likely drive the New Energy industries into recession for 2009.

Greg Wetstone, senior director (governmental/public affairs), American Wind Energy Association (AWEA): “We’re watching closely and hoping the House and Senate come together very soon…This is crunch time, and I hope we see things get down to business very quickly.”

When NewEnergyNews questioned a House staffer on whether he thought the new House measure has a chance in the Senate, his answer was challenging. “You don’t think a bill that passed 96-2 has a chance with these changes?”

Just as the staffer overestimated the “yes” votes on the Senate measure (it was 93, not 96), he overestimates the chances of anything in this fight going the way it seems likely to go. The fate of the New Energy tax credit extensions is as much in doubt as Bilbo’s fate when he came face to face with the dragon.

Since the middle of 2007, this battle for the fate of New Energy in 2009 has been burning like a fire signaling the partisanship now on display in the more prominent financial market bailout fight. It is the same as it has been all along: The House won't pass the extensions without the "pay-fors" and a filibustering minority in the Senate may block any legislation with them.

Some speculate Congressional hesitation is due to a fear there will be no revenues to fund the credits in the wake of the financial crisis bail out. New Energy advocates say failure to extend the credits will make the crisis worse while passage will resuscitate the New Energy sector and drive recovery.

H.R. 7060 is probably the best (though largely the same) version of the tax credit extensions. It extends the production tax credit (PTC) for wind a year, the PTC for biomass, hydrokinetic and geothermal energies 2 years, and the investment tax credit for solar and small wind 8 years. It has an 8-year extension on energy efficiency building improvement tax credits as well as tax benefits for buying electric vehicles (EVs) and for producing cellulosic ethanol and advanced biodiesel. It also extends major R&D tax credits.

The bill includes many of the same benefits (to veterans, teachers, Native Americans, hurricane victims, etc.) that were in the Senate package.

From an environmental point of view, H.R. 7060 improves the previous Senate bill. It still has tax credits for “clean” coal development. But it no longer provides tax credits to oil shale producers and coal-to-liquid producers. While this will please environmentalists, these removals could add to the difficulty of winning Senate passage.

The new House measure also removes a controversial benefit to New York City although why any patriotic citizen would object to a tax credit to help rebuild the World Trade Center zone baffles NewEnergyNews.

The pay-fors are said to have come at the insistence of the conservative “Blue-Dog” Democrats. In combination with fiscally conservative Republicans, they represent enough of a factor to steer legislation.

Steny Hoyer (D-Md), Blue Dog and Majority Leader, House of Representatives: "…it is simply wrong to pay for [the tax extenders package] by once more whipping out the national credit card…Fiscal responsibility is not something we can compromise on, especially not now…”

Fiscal conservatism is no doubt a factor but it is also the case that many Blue Dog Democrats, like many Republicans, have big oil industry and financial institution constituencies and the pay-fors come largely from oil industry and financial institution tax breaks.

Point of tangential interest: The AMT (not relevant to energy) is not a sticking point. It was discharged earlier.

With all the turmoil over the financial market stabilization legislation, it is impossible to know when the House will finish with the New Energy tax credit extension legislation and when the Senate will take it up. If the market stabilization proposal remains embattled, Bilbo Baggins may come into the fray on Friday. If the Princes of partisanship resolve their differences over how to deal with the financial crisis, New Energy could get tacked on to bigger legislation or get put off until after the Jewish holiday.

The White House said Tuesday President Bush would sign the tax extenders package passed in the Senate. That was before House pay-fors, to which the President is known to object, were added in. Now a veto is more likely.

So, like the man said, “Everything is up in the air, everything is on the table…”

WHEN- Passed in the House September 25.- Taken up by the Senate ???- December 31: The House must approve the measure before the existing ITC expires on the last day of the year. - Congress was expected to adjourn for the election September 26 but the financial crisis leaves that in doubt.

WHEREIn limbo.

WHY- Research from Navigant Consulting shows the 8-year tax credit extension means 440,000 new solar industry jobs and a doubling of new solar capacity to ~630 megawatts in 2009. - H.R. 7060:(1) extends the production tax credit (PTC) for wind 1 year, (2) extends the PTC for biomass, hydrokinetic and geothermal energies 2 years, (3) extends the investment tax credit (ITC) for solar systems and small wind turbines 8 years, (4) has an 8-year extension on energy efficiency building improvement tax credits, (5) has tax benefits for buying electric vehicles (EVs), has tax benefits for producing cellulosic ethanol and advanced biodiesel, (6) includes many of the same benefits (to veterans, teachers, Native Americans, hurricane victims, etc.) that were in the package passed by the Senate September 23,(7) includes tax credits for “clean” coal development, (8) extends major R&D tax credits,(9) excludes tax credits to oil shale producers and coal-to-liquid producers, (10) removes the controversial tax credit to New York City to help redevelop the World Trade Center zone.- H.R. 7060 pay-fors:(1) freezes an oil industry deduction on earnings (raising $4.9 billion over 10 years), (2) changes the way stock sales are accounted for (raising $6.7 billion/10 years), (3) extends existing taxes on unemployment income and the oil spill liability fund ($3.2 billion/10 years), (4) redefines foreign oil earnings and expenses ($2.2 billion/10 years), (5) postpones a cut in taxes on foreign interest earnings ($18.6 billion/10 years),(6) closes a loophole on deferred compensation from tax haven corporations ($24.8 billion/10 years).

QUOTES- Rhone Resch, President, Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), on what passage means: "You're going to see national markets open up for residential solar…"- Lyndon Rive, CEO, SolarCity: "Without [the ITC], we're not going to have scale that brings solar to grid parity, and investors aren't going to be interested…"- Charles Rangel (D-NY), chairman, House Ways and Means Committee: “We can wrap this up today if they don’t insist it’s their way or the highway…They should not miss this opportunity to pass this bill so we can make law and provide this tax relief to families and businesses.”- Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif), Speaker, House of Representatives: “I’m optimistic we can come to an agreement. These extenders have to pass.”- Harry Reid (D-Nev), Majority Leader, Senate: “It would be a terrible shame to the American people that a small group of members of the House or Representatives would hold up this extremely important package…”

COAL COUNTRY, NATION AGREE – NEW WIND, NEW SUN & NO NEW COAL

From the heart of coal country, comes news of a cry for New Energy. A newly released poll shows 52% of West Virginians want the next President and Congress to achieve energy independence by relying on clean energy sources, rather than coal, oil and nuclear power plants. "…their number one [2009] energy-related priority for the nation [is] promoting energy sources such as wind or solar, more conservation of energy, and hybrid or other highly fuel-efficient cars…"

Nationally, 59% hold this position.

71% of West Virginians (73% nationally) want new coal plant construction stopped for 5 years if New Energy development is stepped up.

90% of West Virginians (92% nationally) see solar energy as a power source of “tomorrow.” 86% of West Virginians (88% nationally) see wind as a power source of “tomorrow.” 64% of West Virginians (67% nationally) see oil as a power source of “yesterday.”

Graham Hueber, Senior Researcher, Opinion Research Corporation (ORC): "What we see in our survey work is that national and state-level attitudes about energy and climate action vary relatively little, even when you drill down into views of the coal state of West Virginia. In fact, in some respects, the residents of West Virginia are even more inclined than other Americans to look beyond coal and other carbon-based fuels to renewable energy sources."

58% of West Virginians (52% nationally) want subsidies/tax breaks/incentives for wind and solar power equal to those for coal-fired and nuclear power plants. 22% of West Virginians (30% nationally) go even farther and want government to "shift all or most [subsidies/tax breaks/incentives] from nuclear power and coal-fired power plants to energy sources such as wind and solar."

45% of West Virginians (40% nationally) have “a small degree of confidence" that political leaders will act. 26% of West Virginians (27% nationally) have "no confidence" they will act.

Pam Solo, President/Founder CSI: "West Virginia residents and other Americans deserve credit for understanding that more investment by the state and federal governments in coal and nuclear power is essentially the same thing as investing in subprime mortgages. If U.S. taxpayers are going to directly or indirectly underwrite energy development and energy-intensive industries - such as the auto industry - we need to insist that state officials in Charleston and the next Congress and President make good, solid investments that make sense for the long-term of our country. The only energy investments that rise above the 'subprime' level today are wind, solar and other clean renewable energy in concert with enhanced energy efficiency."

87% of West Virginians (91% nationally) believe reliance on fossil fuels is the product of the 19th-and-early-20th-century industrial revolution and it is time to phase them out in favor of New Energy.

84% of West Virginians (78% nationally) think it is necessary to “take timely and decisive steps” to deal with global climate change by building New Energy, believe it will require “tough choices” but agree we “…cannot afford to postpone decisions since there are no perfect options."

Grant Smith, national project coordinator, CLEAN: "Investments in coal and nuclear power are the Countrywide Financial subprime mortgages of the energy world. What the public is saying in this survey is that we support government making investments in the energy sources of tomorrow, but we have to stop flushing money down the drain by propping up the failing energy sources of yesterday…After the current financial debacle on Wall Street, it is hard to imagine that Americans are going to allow more dumb investments by Charleston and Washington on the wrong energy sources."

One last point, a warning to political leaders: 93% of West Virginians (91% nationally) consider candidates’ views on energy important in their voting decisions. 65% of West Virginians (58% nationally) consider the candidates’ views on energy "very important."

WHEREThe surveys were made nationally and in West Virginia, the heart of coal country.

WHY- 62% of West Virginians (50% Republicans, 69% Democrats, 68% Independents) oppose blasting the wind farm site at Coal River Mountain for mountaintop removal coal mining. (15% strongly support the action, 39% strongly oppose it.)- W.V. Governor Manchin favors the mountaintop removal mining of Coal River Mountain.- More than three out of five West Virginia residents prefer that tax breaks/incentives either (1) be divided "between renewable energy, such as wind and solar, and coal-to-liquid plants" (49%) or (2) go entirely to "support (for) renewable energy such as wind and solar" (27%). Only 23% want tax breaks/incentives solely for coal-to-liquid plants. - W.V. Governor Manchin is directing ~$200 million in state tax breaks/incentives to developers of a coal-to-liquids plant.- Only 38% of West Virginians (26% nationally) favor promoting more coal-fired power plants, oil from offshore drilling and nuclear power. Only 8% (10% nationally) think the U.S. needs no change from its present dependence on foreign energy sources. - Only 16% of West Virginians (10% nationally) would leave subsidies/tax breaks/incentives for nuclear power and coal-fired power the same.- 62% of West Virginians(63% nationally): "global warming is a problem and we have limited time to figure out the solutions to it."- 18% of West Virginians (18% nationally) see “a positive or neutral economic impact” from making changes to deal with global climate change.- 56% of West Virginians (67% nationally) pick New Energy over coal or nuclear. 4% of West Virginians (8% nationally) want nuclear and 18% of West Virginians (3% nationally) want coal.

QUOTES- Janet Keating, executive director, OHVEC: "It's great to know that the majority of West Virginians are in step with the rest of the nation when it comes to energy and climate issues. Now is the time for our state-level and national political leaders to begin the transition to a new energy future…" - Grant Smith, national project coordinator, CLEAN: "It makes no sense to be making 50-year investments in new coal-fired power plants. Energy efficiency and renewable technologies already have overtaken, in many instances, or will soon overtake, in other instances, coal-fired power in terms of direct cost and are far superior in terms of financial risk, economic benefit, and the ability to address global warming. There is no viable model under which new nuclear power plants can be constructed as anything other than multi-billion-dollar public works boondoggles…"

Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that will ReCharge America by Sherry Boschert: "Smart companies plan ahead and try to be the first to adopt new technology that will give them a competitive advantage. That’s what Toyota and Honda did with hybrids, and now they’re sitting pretty. Whichever company is first to bring a good plug-in hybrid to market will not only change their fortune but change the world."

Oil On The Brain; Adventures from the Pump to the Pipeline by Lisa Margonelli: "Spills are one of the costs of oil consumption that don’t appear at the pump. [Oil consultant Dagmar Schmidt Erkin]’s data shows that 120 million gallons of oil were spilled in inland waters between 1985 and 2003. From that she calculates that between 1980 and 2003, pipelines spilled 27 gallons of oil for every billion “ton miles” of oil they transported, while barges and tankers spilled around 15 gallons and trucks spilled 37 gallons. (A ton of oil is 294 gallons. If you ship a ton of oil for one mile you have one ton mile.) Right now the United States ships about 900 billion ton miles of oil and oil products per year."

NOTEWORTHY IN THE MEDIA:
NewEnergyNews would welcome any media-saavy volunteer who would like to re-develop this section of the page. Announcements and reviews of film, television, radio and music related to energy and environmental issues are welcome.

Review of OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The American Decades by Mark S. Friedman

OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The American Decades, the second volume of Herman K. Trabish’s retelling of oil’s history in fiction, picks up where the first book in the series, OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The Story of Our Addiction, left off. The new book is an engrossing, informative and entertaining tale of the Roaring 20s, World War II and the Cold War. You don’t have to know anything about the first historical fiction’s adventures set between the Civil War, when oil became a major commodity, and World War I, when it became a vital commodity, to enjoy this new chronicle of the U.S. emergence as a world superpower and a world oil power.

As the new book opens, Lefash, a minor character in the first book, witnesses the role Big Oil played in designing the post-Great War world at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Unjustly implicated in a murder perpetrated by Big Oil agents, LeFash takes the name Livingstone and flees to the U.S. to clear himself. Livingstone’s quest leads him through Babe Ruth’s New York City and Al Capone’s Chicago into oil boom Oklahoma. Stymied by oil and circumstance, Livingstone marries, has a son and eventually, surprisingly, resolves his grievances with the murderer and with oil.

In the new novel’s second episode the oil-and-auto-industry dynasty from the first book re-emerges in the charismatic person of Victoria Wade Bridger, “the woman everybody loved.” Victoria meets Saudi dynasty founder Ibn Saud, spies for the State Department in the Vichy embassy in Washington, D.C., and – for profound and moving personal reasons – accepts a mission into the heart of Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe. Underlying all Victoria’s travels is the struggle between the allies and axis for control of the crucial oil resources that drove World War II.

As the Cold War begins, the novel’s third episode recounts the historic 1951 moment when Britain’s MI-6 handed off its operations in Iran to the CIA, marking the end to Britain’s dark manipulations and the beginning of the same work by the CIA. But in Trabish’s telling, the covert overthrow of Mossadeq in favor of the ill-fated Shah becomes a compelling romance and a melodramatic homage to the iconic “Casablanca” of Bogart and Bergman.

Monty Livingstone, veteran of an oil field youth, European WWII combat and a star-crossed post-war Berlin affair with a Russian female soldier, comes to 1951 Iran working for a U.S. oil company. He re-encounters his lost Russian love, now a Soviet agent helping prop up Mossadeq and extend Mother Russia’s Iranian oil ambitions. The reunited lovers are caught in a web of political, religious and Cold War forces until oil and power merge to restore the Shah to his future fate. The romance ends satisfyingly, America and the Soviet Union are the only forces left on the world stage and ambiguity is resolved with the answer so many of Trabish’s characters ultimately turn to: Oil.

Commenting on a recent National Petroleum Council report calling for government subsidies of the fossil fuels industries, a distinguished scholar said, “It appears that the whole report buys these dubious arguments that the consumer of energy is somehow stupid about energy…” Trabish’s great and important accomplishment is that you cannot read his emotionally engaging and informative tall tales and remain that stupid energy consumer. With our world rushing headlong toward Peak Oil and epic climate change, the OIL IN THEIR BLOOD series is a timely service as well as a consummate literary performance.

Review of OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The Story of Our Addiction by Mark S. Friedman

"...ours is a culture of energy illiterates." (Paul Roberts, THE END OF OIL)

OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, a superb new historical fiction by Herman K. Trabish, addresses our energy illiteracy by putting the development of our addiction into a story about real people, giving readers a chance to think about how our addiction happened. Trabish's style is fine, straightforward storytelling and he tells his stories through his characters.

The book is the answer an oil family's matriarch gives to an interviewer who asks her to pass judgment on the industry. Like history itself, it is easier to tell stories about the oil industry than to judge it. She and Trabish let readers come to their own conclusions.

She begins by telling the story of her parents in post-Civil War western Pennsylvania, when oil became big business. This part of the story is like a John Ford western and its characters are classic American melodramatic heroes, heroines and villains.

In Part II, the matriarch tells the tragic story of the second generation and reveals how she came to be part of the tales. We see oil become an international commodity, traded on Wall Street and sought from London to Baku to Mesopotamia to Borneo. A baseball subplot compares the growth of the oil business to the growth of baseball, a fascinating reflection of our current president's personal career.

There is an unforgettable image near the center of the story: International oil entrepreneurs talk on a Baku street. This is Trabish at his best, portraying good men doing bad and bad men doing good, all laying plans for wealth and power in the muddy, oily alley of a tiny ancient town in the middle of everywhere. Because Part I was about triumphant American heroes, the tragedy here is entirely unexpected, despite Trabish's repeated allusions to other stories (Casey At The Bat, Hamlet) that do not end well.

In the final section, World War I looms. Baseball takes a back seat to early auto racing and oil-fueled modernity explodes. Love struggles with lust. A cavalry troop collides with an army truck. Here, Trabish has more than tragedy in mind. His lonely, confused young protagonist moves through the horrible destruction of the Romanian oilfields only to suffer worse and worse horrors, until--unexpectedly--he finds something, something a reviewer cannot reveal. Finally, the question of oil must be settled, so the oil industry comes back into the story in a way that is beyond good and bad, beyond melodrama and tragedy.

Along the way, Trabish gives readers a greater awareness of oil and how we became addicted to it. Awareness, Paul Roberts said in THE END OF OIL, "...may be the first tentative step toward building a more sustainable energy economy. Or it may simply mean that when our energy system does begin to fail, and we begin to lose everything that energy once supplied, we won't be so surprised."

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.